misswonderly3
-
Posts
12,768 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
36
Posts posted by misswonderly3
-
-
Why am I not surprised that LHF doesn't like the 1931 version of The Maltese Falcon?
And before the Humphrey Bogart version (which I tend to think of more as a straight mystery than noir) there was Stranger on the Third Floor and even before that the French Le jour se lève (aka Daybreak and remade in Hollywood as The Long Night).
Ok, but none of that takes away from how well-done and enjoyable ( and noirish) Huston's Maltese Falcon is.
-
1
-
-
Thanks for the great write up Miss Wonderly! Here on the West Coast, the series is on at an even more "un-noiry" time--7AM! I will definitely have to record any noir film that sounds interesting to me. I love The Maltese Falcon. It is so much fun. I agree with everything you said. My husband and I saw it last year in the theater and it was an even more fun experience on the big screen and you notice so much more.....
....One of my favorite parts of the movie is the scene between Bogart and Greenstreet in the hotel. That scene is so much fun to watch--both guys thinking they have a one-up on each other. ....
speedy, your entire post was worth quoting, but I just selected parts of it because I wanted to say one more thing about how funny the film is, which you mention in the parts of your comment I quoted above.
There's a scene in Spade's apartment that's an example of how funny the film is. He's got Cairo and Brigid there, he's trying to get to the truth of things (good luck, Sam baby), when the cops call on him ( at 1 in the morning, yet.)
While he's talking to them at the door, there's the sound of a scuffle, a scream, a call for help ( not from the lady, from the gentleman !)
When the cops and Spade rush in to the apartment, they're treated to a scene of Cairo and O'Shaughnessy calling each other liars and other names. What I find hilarious is the bit where Brigid gets so irritated with Cairo, she kicks him ! They're like a couple of kids, brother and sister fighting while the parents try to calm them down. I have to laugh out loud when the furious Brigid boots Cairo, hard, with her pointy high heeled shoe !
Thanks for your post ( and not just the part I quoted). It's so nice that you and your husband got to see this wonderful movie up on the big screen.
-
1
-
-
It would be much appreciated if you could do this every week, for those of us who can't see them, such as yours truly.
Gee, D.G.F., I'm genuinely touched. I thought you were going to say something about how loooong my post was, and since you're a man who does not like a man ( or woman) who talks a lot, I was expecting some kind of crack, maybe a request to keep it short if I actually expected anyone to read it.
Then again, I know you're a big noir fan, so maybe you decided to make an exception for my loquacious ways with this thread.
You know, you could always reschedule your spinning class? (oh maybe not.) Could you just jump on an actual bike and go for a good long cycling ride through the streets of San Francisco ( or Philadelphia) after the Sunday morning screenings?
Or get a DVR. You're a smart guy, I know you could easily figure it out. Think of all the great TCM movies you could view at your own convenience. (full disclosure: I myself do not have a DVR. But that doesn't mean you couldn't.)
-
I'm going to try and post a little write-up of each film shown in this series, hopefully shortly after it's aired (Sunday mornings at 10, not the most noirish day or time, but that's when they're doing it. Of course, people can always record and watch later.)
The series kicked off with what many - and certainly host Eddie Muller - believe to be the first true noir, the 1941 version of The Maltese Falcon.
This is one of those movies that is so famous and so familiar to so many (even non-classic movie fans), that at first it feels like there can't be much more to say about it, it's been discussed and analysed so often. But in fact, like all great films, you just notice and enjoy more and more things about it with every subsequent viewing.
So, I'm not going to talk about the plot. As far as I'm concerned, the plot is the least important feature of film noirs. They're almost always very complicated, often verging on incomprehensible. Doesn't matter, because film noir is all about character, mood, and style. And John Huston's The Maltese Falcon has all three of the above in spades. ( couldn't resist.)
Why is this film so much fun? (Well, my idea of fun...) Because it's full of clever quotable dialogue, larger-than-life characters ( and not just Gutman, large as he is), and wonderfully atmospheric sets ( don't know how much if any was actually shot on location in San Francisco, but regardless, the film looks great.)
It took this viewing, which must be at least my 10th, to realize that Sydney Greenstreet actually has only three scenes. But they're such scenes ! I always thought he was in it throughout the film, but in fact we don't even see him until about 50 minutes in. But he dominates the scenes he's in - quite a feat, when you're in the same room with Humphrey Bogart and Peter Lorre. He's so transparently full of ****, you've got to admire the way he talks and reacts to Bogart. He unblinkingly claims he loves a man who talks a lot, a man who drinks a lot, and a man who says exactly what he means. He's just reacting to whatever Bogart says, every step of the way. There's something so skillful and funny about it, you have to laugh.
Then there's Peter Lorre. I love the way Huston and Bogart - as well of course as Lorre himself - get across the fact that Cairo is gay, without overtly referring to it. Back in 1941 they couldn't do this, and anyway, it's more fun to see how they convey the character's sexual orientation without openly alluding to it. Yes, by today's standards it's a stereotypical and somewhat negative portrayal of a gay character, but it was also 1941. And hey, we root for Cairo, don't we? At least I do. Like Sam Spade, you gotta respect a guy who's just been roughed up and had his gun taken from him, only to do it all over again ( pull a gun on Spade and insist on searching his room) when he gets the gun back.
Then there's the gunsel - oh, Elisha Cook Jr., I love you. Cook was actually around in minor Hollywood films a while ( 10 years or so?) before getting the role of Wilmer in T.M.F. I love the way he glares at Sam Spade, hating how he humiliates him but knowing there's nothing he can do about it. Poor old Wilmer. He's "just like a son" to Gutman ( yeah, right), but he's going to be the fall guy anyway.
As for Mary Astor, she's a wonderful femme fatale from start to finish. Yeah, I get a kick out of her prissy Miss Wonderly act in her first scene, but she's perfect all the way through, right to that despairing blank look on her face as the elevator doors ( yup, looking just like prison) close on her.
I've left a lot out, but I don't want to go on too long (although Gutman would probably approve, since he's a man who likes to talk) but there's one last aspect of The Maltese Falcon that I wanted to mention: This movie is really funny ! Maybe you have to have seen it a few times to pick up on that. Or maybe it's just that I know it and love it so well, it makes me smile. But so much of the dialogue is funny ( how about when Spade asks O'Shaughnessy if she's going to wander all around her apartment touching things again? Maybe it's the way Bogart says it...), and so much of the characterizations of these people is amusing, it's now a noir that makes me laugh - not that I don't take it seriously as a great early noir.
Anyway, this deservedly classic noir kicked the Noir Alley series off with a bang, Shirley everyone who's ever seen it loves it too. (yes?)
-
7
-
-
and in honor of tonight's Oscarcast,
Forget the swan.
Forget Gwyneth's Goth Orangutang ****.
THIS- for the Record- is THE UGLIEST OSCAR DRESS OF ALL TIME.
Who IS that? It's driving me crazy, she looks so familiar, but I can't bring her name to mind. I "search google for this image" ed, but all I got was "Helen Mirren". This woman is obviously not Helen Mirren.
Please tell me who she is, I don't know why I can't identify her.
Anyway agreed....It's a wretched outfit to begin with, and it's only made worse by the horrible dishwater grey colour.
Some unsolicited advice which no one's going to listen to: Ladies, if you're attending a gala event, do not wear grey, and if you're white, do not wear anything white people flesh-coloured, at least if you want people to see you.
Hey, here's an idea: colour is nice, especially deep rich colours ; also, nothing wrong with classic basic black.
Here's an example of how the flesh-coloured thing doesn't work on some people:
Now, I love Emma Stone, and she's a lovely young woman. But her skin tone is so white, it's almost translucent. Again, nothing wrong with that in itself ( right, Julianne Moore and Nicole Kidman?) But when you're that white, wear something that contrasts with your skin, not that works to make you disappear into your outfit. Emma would have looked so great in green, or even black.
-
1
-
-
Learning the origin and meanings of the various memes can be soul draining in its banality.
"Cash me ousside how bow dah" has its origins in a segment from the Dr. Phil show about a delinquent teenage girl. When the audience laughed at her attitude, she responded by saying "Catch me outside. How about that?", meaning she was willing to fight anyone laughing at her. Her ridiculous accent, though, made it sound slurred and more like "Cash me ousside how bow dah".
This became a recurrent theme on the internet because we as a society have too much time on our hands.
Thanks, Lawrence.
Still, I'm not quite sure why roycronin applied this expression to Ryan Gosling, who, far from any kind of aggression or defensiveness about the whole fiasco, looked pretty amused about it all.
sorry the pic is so large....I find it difficult to locate smaller pics on the "google images" sites.
-
Speaking of Robin Hood ( via Frank Sinatra), I've always thought those pointy Robin Hood type hats women were so fond of in the 30s were particularly unflattering and ridiculous -looking.
I know some have been posted here already (like Greta Garbo's crazy pointy head column in Ninotchka !) but here's another:
I don't know who looks sillier...Kate looks like she's trying out a dinner plate on her head, but then, Doris Nolan appears to be going for the upside-down ice cream cone ( sans ice cream) look.
-
Ryan Gosling be all like Cash me Ousside howbow dah!
What does that mean? I'm afraid I'm out-of-it when it comes to this kind of stuff.
-
You probably already know how they nominate vs. final winners-(I think it should be the same process myself)
Performers can only nominate actors,etc Directors the same & so-on. I';ve long had a theory that it would be more accurate if they voted for final winners in the same fashion-(rules)
But, in nominating process all get to vote for their top 8-10 flix
I don't care about all that stuff. As I've stated many times, I have no interest in the Oscars as a criterion for the quality of a film ( or actor, or director, etc.) and only watch them to see if anything outrageous happens ( which it sometimes does, as in the other night.)
All this business about how the selections are made is just a bore to me.
I was actually hoping someone else might have a comment or two about Manchester by the Sea, but I guess, as Lawrence suggested, that conversation is taking place on another thread.
ps: Also, I was not suggesting, in my earlier post about the film, that I thought Manchester by the Sea should have received the best picture award. I thought it was a very good movie, but then, as far as I can tell ( I haven't seen all of them yet), all the nominees (nominations?) were good.
I've always felt the whole procedure is a bit too much like comparing apples, oranges, peaches, and kiwis. They're all good, and they're all very different from one another.
-
I thought this was an interesting thread idea. How come it's fizzled out?
-
To each his own. My choice was Manchester by the Sea. I haven't seen La La Land or Jackie.
The Academy's voting process for "best film" is ludicrous.
SPOILER (sort of)
Manchester by the Sea is an outstanding film. The tragic material in it could have so easily been overdone, overwrought. The filmmakers could have taken the viewers by the collar and shaken them with over-emotive music and maybe a big dramatic scene between Lee and Randi (or Lee and anyone in the film, for that matter.)
Instead, they opted for restraint, and it works beautifully. When something as terrible as what happens to Lee's family occurs, it doesn't need music or emotional speeches to point the way to how the audience should feel. We see what happens once, and that is enough.
This restraint is one of the reasons the movie's so good.
-
1
-
-
I love Redemption Song - my favourite Bob Marley tune. It always moves me.
-
Y'know, it's beginning to appear that some of you judge a movie based on how it does come Oscar time, and others sound like they wait to see what the gross is.
How much an individual likes any movie doesn't depend on EITHER. Nor does how good a movie really is.
Sepiatone
I've said here many times that I put no stock in Oscar awards whatsoever. I couldn't care less, and although I do watch the ceremony every year, that's just for fun (although lately they've been more boring than fun), for seeing stars I like swan around, and for being catty about the gowns ( see my catty comment about this in Lorna's "Toxic Oscar Shock" thread).
I think 99 per cent of the time the Academy gets it wrong, and I have no interest in that whole "Oscar" thing in which people debate who deserved what.
Furthermore, I'm not big on according a category of "best" in the first place, whether it's a movie, actor, musician, song, book, or thin crust pizza ( well, maybe that last one...)
Movies are so different from one another, in style, content, "message" ( or lack of), mood, production values, etc. etc., that it seems pointless to me to compare and contrast them as so many people like to do - the Academy most of all.
This is not to say that I don't have personal favourites, and of course I like some movies and dislike others as much as anyone. I'm just not a movie fan who subscribes to the idea that there is one single "best" movie, actor, actress, etc. for every year, and that the "winner" is intrinsically better than its fellow contenders.
-
1
-
-
Oh yes? Name three. BLOATED DRIVEL
"Bloated" ??
Whatever criticisms you might have about Moonlight, I would not think "bloated" would be one of them.
To me, "bloated" usually refers to a film that is too long (Moonlight's less than 2 hours), or too dialogue-heavy (actually, it has much less dialogue than most films, and it has long periods of silence), or over-done grandiose production values ( no sign of that here.)
So criticize away, I actually might agree with you on some of your problems with it, but honestly, "bloated" isn't one of them.
"Bloated", I've noticed, is a word people have been using lately to apply to any film, book, song, or commentary they don't like, whether its application is apt or not.
-
Yes. I was being kind.
I don't get it. What do you look for in a movie, and - yes, I'm literally asking for it - what exactly was it about Moonlight that rendered it so sub-par in your opinion?
-
I don't believe this mediocre film won. Let's see the numbers.
Moonlight "mediocre"? Have you seen it?
-
None of us here ( as in, on this thread), have actually stated which film they thought deserved the win.
Full disclosure: I have not yet seen La-La Land. I really want to, I just haven't really had the chance yet. I expect I will enjoy it. I have a pretty good idea what it will be like, and all signs point to my liking it ( as in, likable stars, 2 hours to look at Ryan Gosling, a retro 50s Hollywood setting, a musical, etc. etc.)
However: I have seen Moonlight. It's a profoundly moving film. If you've seen it, you won't forget it. It's hard to imagine anyone thinking a lightweight wisp - even a wonderfully made, perfect-in-every-way, delightful wisp such as La-La Land - would be a greater movie than Moonlight.
Again, I don't want anyone thinking I'm dissing La-La Land; I fully expect I'll love it. And in fact, it's the old apples and oranges thing: they are so different, it's silly to compare them.
Still, having blathered all this, I do believe the right decision was made. Moonlight deserves the best picture award.
As for the Big Gaffe: well, it lent some major excitement to an otherwise boring night. I suspect a splendid time was had by all - except maybe for whoever made the envelope mistake, and Meryl Streep.
-
1
-
-
oh, to take it back to THE INFAMOUS INCIDENT IN QUESTION, do any of the rest of you "take a fancy" to the bald, bearded LALALALAND producer who snatched the envelope and informed the audience what happened?
and by "take a fancy" i mean "find him sexy"?
a pic for reference:
I think his name is Jordan Horowitz. And I agree, there's something attractive about him.
-
1
-
-
I know you weren't knocking her, Lawrence....and yeah, maybe that choker-necklace thing does look a little uncomfortable. But she wears it well.
Brie looks good. I liked her in Room. I do think, however, that if she disapproves that strongly of Casey Affleck, she shouldn't have agreed to present for best actor, since she must have known there was a good chance that he'd win.
I have no trouble separating the art from the artist; also, Casey's case never went to trial, nothing nasty was ever proven about him ( and even his accusers did not allege he'd committed sexual assault, more inappropriate sexual harrassment - not that that's ok....)
Casey Affleck played a very difficult character with sensitivity and passion, and I think he deserved the win - well, a tie with Densel ( who has never been accused of sexual harrassment, as far as I know.)
As for Amy, again, I'm not crazy about the white-on-white look. And Amy's a bit too young for that older-woman style gown. Meryl or Helen Mirren, sure. Amy should enjoy being young and go with a less matronly look while she can.
-
2
-
-
I saw an interview with her before the show, and in closeup her necklace looked like a torture device.
I don't care. She's really different, she really stands out from everybody else. She has a beautifully regal bearing- this translates to the films I've seen her in ( Moonlight and Hidden Figures.) Guess I'm a fan.
-
So, no thoughts on what I said about how wretched Jimmy Kimmel was, or the white-on-white evening gowns, or anything I said in my critique of the rest of this year's Oscar night?
Shirley at least everyone can agree that Janelle Monae looked incredible ( in a good way), although yes, the top half of that amazing gown is just a bit revealing, but hey, that's the style these days.
-
COPIED AND PASTED FROM A "NEW YORKER" ARTICLE:
FAYE DUNAWAY: "I really ****** that up!"
Had the Oscar for Best Picture been awarded to Moonlight without incident on Sunday night, The New Yorker’s Michael Schulman likely would have written a more typical party report, filled with observations about who ignored whom, and overheard conversations between Nicole Kidman and Emma Stone. But because of the, uh, envelope problem, it opens with some commentary from Cheryl Boone Isaacs, the president of the Academy.
Isaacs was “sitting on a white sofa staring at her phone” when Schulman asked what was “going through her mind.” With or without looking up from her phone (that part wasn’t clear), she said:
She then sighed and said, “And it was such a wonderful show.” .....
Nope. Not a wonderful show. One of the most boring Oscar shows ever, and there've been some dozies (for boring.) The only interesting moment was the ****-up. It was at that point that I woke up from the torpor the show had put me into and finally started paying attention.
Because of "the mistake", all the usual type criticisms of the Oscar show were skipped over this year. So I'll put in my 2 cents worth:
Jimmy Kimmel was a stunningly bland host, clearly so afraid of offending somebody that he receded into the background - not even that, the background was more interesting than he was. The running gag about insulting Matt Damon became tedious fast, the tour bus people was a lame gimmick, cooked up to liven up the show and miserably failing, and the doughnuts from the ceiling idea was just a re-make of Ellen DeGeneres' pizza order from 3 years ago - and it wasn't funny or entertaining then, either.
And what was the deal with all those super white-skinned women wearing flesh-coloured gowns? Ladies - Emma, Nicole, Charlize - you are beautiful women, so why make yourselves invisible by wearing dresses the same colour as your skin? The gowns were pretty but pale - pale on pale doesn't work. Did you want to disappear? Green and blue look good on pale ladies, as does black. Ditch the white and pale gold coloured gowns for some colour.
By the way, all the black ladies looked fabulous. I especially liked the beautiful Janelle Monae and her amazing princess dress. No, she's not a princess, she's a queen. And looks and acts like one.
-
i can't remeber if i've shared this link already or not, but it's a slate article that has many reaction pictures of the various stars in attendance.
Lorna, I couldn't stop laughing ! I love it that Ryan Gosling was smiling - it didn't seem to faze him a bit !
To be fair, it's possible that some of the people who looked horrified might have been shocked at the idea that such a mistake was made, not that Moonlight won over La La Land.
I don't know if this was the case with Meryl Streep, but her face upon hearing the news is absolutely priceless !
-
Really?
She played Paul Newman's ma in SOMEBODY UP THERE LIKES ME the same year she got her first nomination for supporting actress for a very brief (it may be just one scene) role as a drunken mother mourning her dead son in THE BAD SEED. She was also in HOT SPELL as Shirley Booth's pal and had a small role as Diane Keaton's mom in THE FIRST WIVES CLUB.
She was a really, really good actress.
Lorna, I'm not proud of not having heard of her (Eileen Heckart.) There are without doubt many talented people who made their career in film who I'm not familiar with (or should I say "with whom I am not familiar" ?) I wasn't saying I hadn't heard of her as some kind of put-down of her (as in, "Hey, if I haven't heard of them, they can't be any good.")
Somebody Up There Likes Me I've definitely heard of, and almost meant to see,but for some reason I've missed it every time it's been aired on TCM ( which is relatively often.)
Likewise I've never seen Hot Spell - although god knows you can't be a regular poster on this site and not have heard of it !
I have seen The Bad Seed, but it was quite a while ago, and I'm afraid I don't remember that character; but I'll look for her next time I watch that film.
I thought her acceptance speech was tastefully brief ( just as unusual back then as it is now) and well-done.I'm sure she was a good actress, and will keep my eye out for screenings of the films you mentioned.
By the way, I'm embarrassed that I spelt Miss Winters' first name without the second "e" - of course, it's "ShellEy", not "Shelly". I should have known better.
Noir Alley
in General Discussions
Posted
cigarjoe, my friend: I know how much you like film noir, and how much you know about this kind of film. A lot. I respect that.
But I've discovered in the many years I've been a noir fan ( not saying you haven't been a fan probably for an equal number of years) that a lot of noir aficionados get all wrought up about the definition of "noir", which movies on a list of classic noirs don't really belong there, some movies labelled as noir aren't really, etc. etc.
And I get that - I can be like that myself, and have often rolled my eyes at some of the movies some over-eager newbie noir fans want to classify as "noir".
So maybe in reaction to that overly facile kind of noir labelling, you ( and as I said, me too) get annoyed or at the very least, particular about what some people are quick to call a "noir" film.
All this is by way of saying, baby I don't care if I Wake Up Screaming is more legitimately "noir" in terms of its visuals than The Maltese Falcon. You are right, I've seen I.W.U.S. several times, and it's a beautifully noirish movie, definitely belongs on a list of classic noirs, and yes, the visuals beat out Falcon for shadows, rainy streets, camera angles, and many of the other features of noir cinematography.
It's a good movie, I really like it. Who knew Betty Grable had such acting chops? Or Victor Mature? I love Laird Cregar as the sinister morally ambiguous detective , and hey, our friend Elisha Cook Jr. 's in this one, too. (Mr. Cook was actually in a lot of film noirs, as I'm sure you know. He deserves more attention than he gets...)
But sometimes I get kind of weary of us hard-core noir fans splitting hairs over which films deserve the title "noir", and which ones have more "noir" features than others, etc. etc.
They're both good movies, and I'd say, they're both film noirs. I have a bit of a preference for the John Huston film, but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate I Wake Up Screaming.
I just don't think we need to quibble over every shadow, drop of rain, tilted camera angle, or late night diner that is or is not present in a movie classified as a film noir.
I say this with respect, I really appreciate your knowledge and your contributions to these forums.